I was tee’ing up a response almost exactly like yours, but then I get to the last post and there you are…

Anyway, the comparison of Tiger Woods to Lance Armstrong is a good one, except for one thing, Lance is a FAR better athlete and physically unique individual. As much impact as Tiger Woods has had on golf, I would argue that Lance has done much more for cycling, let alone for cancer victims.

When a few of my family members have contracted cancer, I’ve usually gifted them with Lance’s book about his fight with cancer and the return to cycling. To a person, they ALL told me it was so motivational and that it inspired them when the pain from chemo was just too much to bear, they had someone to look up to…everyone should read about his trials with dealing with an aggressive cancer that had spread to his lungs, abdomen, and brain resulting the removal of something like 23 pounds of tumors from his body.

The way cyclists train now has been effected by Lance Armstrong’s training techniques. The way all pro teams are formed and ran, have been effected by Johan Bruyneel and Lance’s formula. Cycling fans all over the world (more people watch cycling live than any other sporting event in the world, long races can have over 2 million spectators over a course), flock to see Lance race and he effects entire local economies by his presence at events. And, while the Tour de France is his trademark event, he does race nearly year round, competing in the most of the big name events in the European circuit (Tour de Suisse, Tour of Italy, World Championships (1993 winner), the Dauphine Libere, etc.).

This guy is the preeminent endurance athlete of the 20th century. NO ONE has had a bigger impact on endurance athletics, and I’d argue he has as big of name impact as Tiger Woods outside of the US. Toss on top of that his ongoing work with cancer…how many of you have ever seen one of his yellow “Livestrong” wrist bands on someone’s wrist? I’d bet every reader here, because his impact transcends cycling.

BTW, Lance Armstrong is the most drug tested athlete on the planet. No one gets tested more than Lance, and believe me, French/European cycling authorities would love nothing more than to prove that Lance/USA was cheating because he was so dominant throughout the 2000s. When Lance won his first TdF in 1999, no one thought it was possible that he did so fairly, so he MUST HAVE been cheating…when Lance never tested positive, he was derided because the other top riders of the world (Marco Pantani (confirmed drug cheat), and Jan Ullrich (confirmed drug cheat)) weren’t in attendance that year…the next year, he destroyed them. In fact, Lance rode during a time when a whole cavalcade of world class riders were there every year for the sole purpose of defeating Lance; Ullrich, Beloki, Pantani, Zulle, Basso, Moreau, Kloden, Virenque, Sastre, Mayo, et al. Every year, Bruyneel and Armstrong put together a better team and focused on the TdF and came away with the biggest prize in cycling.

In the end, I wouldn’t argue whether it was a *smart* decision to fund the US Postal racing team for four years, but it certainly positively promoted the USA around the world and sponsorship of a cancer survivor that then demolished the record for Tour de France wins is a huge publicity win.

]]>By: MTinMNhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-2/#comment-4244059
Mon, 17 Jan 2011 15:43:21 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4244059As others have stated, it is not one race per year. In season, there is a least one event a week, some weeks have squads at 2 different events. Lance focused solely on the Tour de France. While he rode other races, he was riding them as training. Other team members rode to win in those other races. Bastonge-Leige, Paris-Rouboix, Vuelta au Espania, Giro de Italia.

The entire 8 million a year did not go into Lance’s pocket. And at the beginning of the sponsorship, Lance was not the proven superstar he became. He was a promising young rider.

Lots of expenses with a pro cycling team: salaries for 20+ riders, trainers, managers, mechanics. USPostal was one of the first with a team bus on the pro tour. Multiple team cars. Most of the stage races have 2 or 3 team cars following the peloton. Hotels, meals, jerseys, etc.

Now was the expenditure a wise one? Different question, and one all sorts of entities have to evaluate each year. Lots of companies sponsor sports teams. Not all of them get the return they expected. Some get more. Whether USPS did or not, we don’t have enough information. Was it an appropriate choice for USPS? A question that can be analyzed without impugning a sponsored team, individual or sport.

]]>By: Sultry Beautyhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-2/#comment-4243949
Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:48:22 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4243949I’m an avid cycling fan and live in Murrieta where Floyd resided at the time of his drug bust. These comments here are uneducated slander. You may not like the fact that USPS sponsored Lance but you OBVIOUSLY have NO IDEA the impact it had on the sport. You are obviously no expert or even remotely knowledgeable on the matter. I suggest you interview Bob Roll and Paul Sherman and get some facts on the matter. Having said that, using Floyd as a whistle-blower is like using Sheriff Dupnik as a witness in a murder case against Sarah Palin. The man took millions of dollars in a defense fund saying he was innocent then in the end didn’t give any money back and admitted doping at the same time blamed USPS as teaching him how and forcing him to do it. Give me a break. And of course there are constant accusations against Lance. He’s done better than ANY French rider EVER did. You, again, obviously have no clue how French feel about Americans or, better yet, Americans that make them look weak and anemic. Makes them feel better to shade the wins with some color.

Anyone who went through cancer treatment or brain surgery should really THINK about Lance’s achievement and could realize how it WAS achievable without drug enhancement. Prior to his return he used to get a dose of Chemo then climb up a 9% grade mountain puking and riding all the way to the top. When you take your body to the edge and realize how far you can go WITHOUT dying it does something to you’re psyche. People who don’t understand this are just weak minded. Talk to some Spec Ops or Navy SEAL members and watch some fight science videos. Educate yourself before you write crap malign a great American!

The USPS did indeed gain revenue across the 4.5 years they sponsored a professional cycling team.

This goes without saying. What has not been established is that the USPS gained more revenue in those 4.5 years than they would have gained if they didn’t spend the $32 million.

]]>By: Theworldisnotenoughhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-2/#comment-4242405
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 16:46:22 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4242405In case any elected officials happen to read this I would also privatize with the mission to the bidders who lease the USPS to:
1. maintain the pension system for those already retired
2. Those within 5 years of retirement are given the current cash value of pensions, and accelerated access to medicare.
3. Those with over 5 years of service needed to retire are given current cash value and moved into a 403b or 457. And the company is not obligated to contribute.

This of course would have to remain secret. Also as I read my plan it is VERY expensive… If the goverment provides the cash out money it could work and still be profitable for a 30 lease if the company fronts the cash then the lease would have to be longer, 50-75 years, and thwe overall lease less expensive.

]]>By: Theworldisnotenoughhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-2/#comment-4242395
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 16:35:31 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4242395I think the USPS should be privatized on a long term lease, say 30 years. Instead of a board making rules in Washington oversight should have to be initiated by a person that has to contact their congressman.

The USPS provides at least for me good services. There is a branch within walking distance from my house. A branch that is convenient for me to gop to after work and another two blocks away from my bank. When I think about it who uses FedEx or UPS? When I say that I mean who as in an individual. I realize businesses use them. I have received things from FedEx and UPS but never used them to ship. Hmm…

The one single thing that couldnt be done better is that no private firms could possibly cost effectively and WITH profit, deliver to every obsure address in the USA. The Postal Service is not required to make a profit, and it simply cant be a money making venture that any private firm would undertake.

malkinmania on January 16, 2011 at 9:50 AM

That’s the problem – without a profit motive, they have no concern for expenses, leading to years and years of waste and abuse.

]]>By: hopefloatshttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-2/#comment-4242286
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 15:09:31 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4242286Typical government stupidity. Wonder what they were hoping to get in return?
For a real look at government fiscal tomfoolery, check out this link, it’s a real eye-opener for the American taxpayer!
]]>By: malkinmaniahttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-2/#comment-4242264
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 14:50:39 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4242264

The USPS doesn’t do one single thing that couldn’t be done better by a whole range of private firms.
This is just colossally stupid!!!
Lew on January 15, 2011 at 12:05 PM

The one single thing that couldnt be done better is that no private firms could possibly cost effectively and WITH profit, deliver to every obsure address in the USA. The Postal Service is not required to make a profit, and it simply cant be a money making venture that any private firm would undertake. Even if the Postal monopoly was lifted, no business would scramble to get 44 cents to deliver a letter to Alaska’s boon docks. Whether we need the service is another debate, but it does keep UPS and FedEx prices down with constant price undercutting. Mail volume has dwindled plenty in the last decade, but there is still enuf volume to realize that its still very much alive. The problem is the extremely top heavy management. Carrier and clerk positions have been reduced dramatically. I know of an office who has 35 employees and at times there are 7 supervisors who bump into each other. Postal management, as noted in the Armstrong debacle is in such stark contrast with UPS and FedEx way of becoming cost effective.

]]>By: bayviewhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-2/#comment-4242240
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 14:33:15 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4242240Steroid Express?
]]>By: Freelancerhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-1/#comment-4242093
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 11:58:56 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4242093This is not good reporting, Ed. The USPS did indeed gain revenue across the 4.5 years they sponsored a professional cycling team. Amazingly, they were more efficient in their role of management than Discovery Channel was during their tenure as prime sponsor of the same club.

You are mistaken on several other assumptions in your story as well. While the TdF was the highlight of the year for the Lance Armstrong-led teams, significant money was earned (of which the sponsors get a nice share) at dozens of other cycling events globally each year, including two major stage races here in the U.S., the Tour of Georgia and the Tour of California.

As for the comparisons with Tiger, in the cases of other than major or near-major tournaments, he’s seen on TV one or two days of those events, so probably about 40 or 50 days a year of coverage, for no more than two hours at a time, and almost exclusively in the U.S. The Tour de France isn’t a one-day-per-year jaunt, it spans just over three weeks, including 20 racing days, and is by a massive margin the biggest sporting event of the year in all of Europe, with people staying tuned in for more than 7 hours each day. Then there is the Tour du Suisse, the Vuelta d’Espana, the Giro d’Italia, Paris-Roubaix and several other mid-sized stage races which draw massive audiences across Europe, both on TV and on site. I absolutely guarantee you that hours of viewing time for Lance and the USPS team during those four seasons vastly exceeding those watching Tiger.

All in all, the USPS turns out fairly wise to have been backing the most remarkable athlete of our time while at his peak, dominating the most vicious three-week physical contest of its kind for seven consecutive years.

I’m no fan of government waste, but this is a non-story for that purpose. As for the advertising campaigns from government agencies, I’ve always hated them, other than military recruitment ads.

]]>By: skeeterhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-1/#comment-4242003
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 07:14:00 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4242003I am a big fan of Lance’s riding (his personality; not so much) but I am not in favor of any government agency spending money on advertising. The post office is, at minimum, a highly regulated quasi-governmental operation.

Am I the only one noticing how many ads from various government agencies are being run on the stations carrying conservative talk radio? I used to think these were PSAs, but, no, we pay for them.

I don’t need no more stinkin’ propaganda, thanks.

And particularly when I am paying the bill for it.

]]>By: Starlinkhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-1/#comment-4241913
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 05:12:32 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4241913I have enjoyed competitive cycling for years, and ever since his early biographies, there has been a question mark about Lance.

I did notice that his performance fell off a lot this past Tour, and certainly this can be attributable to age. However, Schleck and Contador were very close for most of the large climbs and the rest of the field was compressed as well. Nothing proven of course, but pretty obvious.

My only premise is the facts. It is a fact that many teams and prominent cyclists from 2000 to 2010 have been caught. Therefore, the only conclusion one can come to is if one accepts the premise that Lance was clean, then he seriously out-performed the field multiple consecutive years when many in the field were doping. In the sport of cycling, the odds alone of winning 7 consecutive Tours I would venture is significant. Winning 7 consecutive tours when many teams and riders were doping is not credible.

Hundreds of tests do not sway me either. If you are sophisticated enough to know the testing protocols and testing limits, then it is simply a matter of the quality of italian medical advice you can get. Cyclists work a lifetime to go pro, and winning is everything. If the field is known to be doping, the pressure is enormous in order to get paid and in a sport of seconds, you are not going to be competitive with just training alone.

If you look back at them you’ll see that some Tours are faster than others- one is not always quicker than the one preceding it.

Other than doping one of the factors that will affect the speed is the competitiveness of the field. A number of strong teams and major contenders can work together to keep even the flatter, less strategically significant stages at a higher average speed than normal. The course and the weather can also affect the overall speed. Doping isn’t the only factor to consider.

They don’t race flat out all the time, they race fast enough to beat the guy in second place.

And given that doping was so much more common in the past it’s curious that speeds weren’t significantly higher then than they are now when drug testing regimens are much tougher. As with other sports, more advanced training techniques are wringing every little bit of performance it can from the human body.

]]>By: Sherman1864http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-1/#comment-4241773
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 03:41:06 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4241773Appears the French had this one right all along. The shame of it all! How Gauling!!! Is that actor dude still hanging out with him and hanging out with him?
]]>By: Lewhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-1/#comment-4241770
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 03:40:14 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4241770I don’t give a rat’s @ss if the USPS advertises wisely or not, whether Lance Armstrong is a doper or not, whether the USPS is efficient or not, or whether it actually needs Federal money or not. It’s STUPID to have it be a function of the Federal Government!!!
And as far as it being one of the Constitution’s enumerated powers is concerned, just because the government CAN do it doesn’t mean they SHOULD do it. It’s pointless and stupid and unnecessary, so why in God’s name do we keep doing it?
]]>By: Sloan Morgansternhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-1/#comment-4241697
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 02:56:32 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4241697Fedex advertises for a competitive edge against UPS, mainly, against USPS not so much. I assume the ads played worldwide, maybe not. But who was the intended audience for the ads? The US residents? Like they don’t know about the postal service? I don’t think they were advertising to other countries, philatelists excepted.

Also, I have never had a package lost, damaged or misdirected while using UPS or Fedex. I often get mangled envelops and packages delivered by the Postal Service.

]]>By: GarandFanhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-1/#comment-4241683
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 02:49:01 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4241683Next time there is a request for a postage increase, those #%$@& running the PO should be told – “Go get it from Lance”.
]]>By: ButterflyDragonhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/post-office-paid-almost-32-million-for-lance-armstrong-sponsorship/comment-page-1/#comment-4241441
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 00:04:23 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=124268#comment-4241441

That leaves one factor that’s changed — the drugs.

LenSp1 on January 15, 2011 at 5:45 PM

Actually, you forgot about global warming. With the hotter atmosphere, evaporation occurs more frequently, thus providing a more humid environment.

The humidity actually increases drag coefficients on the …

Okay… I couldn’t do it. I tried to do it with a straight face, but I couldn’t.